"The preponderance of the evidence as to the shooting was not there. The harassment was not legally possible, and defamation was not proven under the law," Ms. Johnson's lawyer, Edwin Lambert of Miller, Leiby & Associates said Tuesday. "So we're going to be seeking relief from the entire verdict, or portions of it, by written motion."

State Supreme Court Justice Desmond Green has given Lambert 30 days — until July 9 — to file the post-verdict motion in writing.

Gross' lawyer, Martin Rubenstein, will then have until July 22 to reply to Lambert's motion. After both attorneys have submitted their papers, Judge Green will hear an oral argument from both sides on Aug. 13.

Lambert, who said he was "completely surprised" by the verdict, stated in court Monday that he would challenge only the harassment and defamation claims, but has since decided to contest the entire verdict.

"On reviewing the whole matter, we're probably going to attack all of it," he said by phone Tuesday. "There is sufficient basis to make that claim."

The jury unanimously found Ms. Johnson liable for shooting and harassing Gross, and five of six jurors agreed that she also sullied his character with false statements.

She was acquitted of all criminal charges associated with the shooting in 2008, but was later sued by Gross for what he said were the residual physical and psychological effects of the attack.

If Monday's verdict is ultimately upheld, but Ms. Johnson is unable to pay the damages, her income or assets may be seized to compensate Gross, his lawyer said.

And while that process may take years, Gross said the suit was never about the money. It was about clearing his name and getting a just verdict.

"What was on my mind this morning was just, 'Is it possible that this jury would just not believe me?'" he said Monday, moments after the jury delivered its verdict. "The dollars attached to it, were a big afterthought."